m a S
r e pl
Editora y Directora / Director & Editor: Alicia Murría Coordinación en Latinoamérica Latin America Coordinators: Argentina: Eva Grinstein México: Bárbara Perea Equipo de Redacción / Editorial Staff: Alicia Murría, Natalia Maya Santacruz, Santiago B. Olmo. info@artecontexto.com Asistente editorial / Editorial Assistant: Natalia Maya Santacruz Directora de Publicidad / Advertising Director: Marta Sagarmínaga publicidad@artecontexto.com Directora de Relaciones Internacionales International Public Relations Manager: Elena Vecino Administración / Accounting Department: Carmen Villalba administracion@artecontexto.com Suscripciones / Subscriptions: Pablo D. Olmos suscripciones@artecontexto.com Distribución / Distribution: distribucion@artecontexto.com Oficinas / Office: Tel. + 34 913 656 596 C/ Santa Ana 14, 2º C. 28005 Madrid. ESPAÑA www.artecontexto.com Diseño / Design: Jacinto Martín El viajero: www.elviajero.org Traducciones / Translations: Joanna Porter y Juan Sebastián Cárdenas
Colaboran en este número / Contributors in this Issue: Agnaldo Farias, Cristiana Tejo, Jacopo Crivelli Visconti, Alicia Murría, Juan de Nieves, Chema González, Raquel Rennó, Eva Grinstein, Bárbara Perea, Ben Johnson, Pedro Medina, Berta Sichel, Uta M. Reindl, Kiki Mazzucchelli, Mónica Núñez Luis, Clara Muñoz, Chus Martínez Domínguez, Francisco Baena, I. M. González, Alejandro Ratia, Mariano Navarro, Santiago B. Olmo, Suset Sánchez, Mireia A. Puigventós, Juan Antonio Álvarez Reyes, Juan Carlos Rego de la Torre. Especial agradecimiento / Special thanks: A Agnaldo Farias por su colaboración en este dossier. To Agnaldo Farias for his help making this dossier
ARTECONTEX TO
ARTECONTEXTO arte cultura nuevos medios es una publicación trimestral de ARTEHOY Publicaciones y Gestión, S.L. Impreso en España por Técnicas Gráficas Forma Producción gráfica: El viajero / Eva Bonilla. Procograf S.L. ISSN: 1697-2341. Depósito legal: M-1968–2004 Todos los derechos reservados. Ninguna parte de esta publicación puede ser reproducida o transmitida por ningún medio sin el permiso escrito del editor. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted by any means without written permission from the publisher. © de la edición, ARTEHOY Publicaciones y Gestión, S.L. © de las imágenes, sus autores © de los textos, sus autores © de las traducciones, sus autores © de las reproducciones, VEGAP. Madrid 2008 Esta publicación es miembro de la Asociación de Revistas Culturales de España (ARCE) y de la Federación Iberoamericana de Revistas Culturales (FIRC)
Esta revista ha recibido una subvención de la Dirección General del Libro, Archivos y Bibliotecas para su difusión en bibliotecas, centros culturales y universidades de España, para la totalidad de los números editados en el año 2008. Esta revista ha recibido una subvención de la Comunidad de Madrid para el año 2007 ARTECONTEXTO reúne diversos puntos de vista para activar el debate y no se identifica forzosamente con todas las opiniones de sus autores. ARTECONTEXTO does not necessarily share the opinions expressed by the authors. La editorial ARTEHOY Publicaciones y Gestión S.L., a los efectos previstos en el art. 32,1, párrafo segundo, del TRLPI se opone expresamente a que cualquiera de las páginas de ARTECONTEXTO sea utilizada para la realización de resúmenes de prensa. Cualquier acto de explotación de la totalidad o parte de las páginas de ARTECONTEXTO precisará de la oportuna autorización, que será concedida por CEDRO mediante licencia y dentro de los límites establecidos en la misma.
6
Dossier ¿Qué sucede en Brasil? / What’s going on in Brazil?
7
Arte contemporáneo brasileño, entre la meditación y la urgencia Contemporary Brazilian Art, Between Meditation and Urgency AGNALDO FARIAS
17
Artistas y política: una relación a la deriva Artists and Politics: A Relationship Adrift CRISTIANA TEJO
25
Rivane Neuenschwander. De [...] y otros mapas... Rivane Neuenschwander. Of [...] and other maps... JACOPO CRIVELLI VISCONTI
35
Conversación con Moacir dos Anjos A Conversation with Moacir dos Anjos AGNALDO FARIAS
43
Entrevista a Lourdes Fernández, directora de ARCO Interview with Lourdes Fernández, director of ARCO ALICIA MURRÍA
51
Isidoro Valcárcel Medina. Ver, pensar y decir Isidoro Valcárcel Medina. See, think and say JUAN DE NIEVES
59
Chen Chieh-Jen dialoga sobre su obra Chen Chieh-Jen talks about his work CHEMA GONZÁLEZ
70
CiberContexto De la construcción a la reconstrucción: Arte digital en Brasil From Construction to Reconstruction: Digital Art in Brazil RAQUEL RENNÓ
78
Info
96
Críticas de exposiciones / Reviews
SIER IL
Primera página / Page One: De quien se espera y a quien se exige / Expecting and Demanding ALICIA MURRÍA
DOS
SUMARIO / INDEX / 17 Portada / Cover: MARCELO CIDADE Amor e ódio à Ligia Clark, 2006. Foto: Ding Musa. Cortesía: Galería Vermelho, São Paulo
5
BRAS
Expecting and Demanding The fumata blanca finally appeared and we learned that the ad hoc committee set up for the purpose had appointed Manuel Borja-Villel and director of the Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofía. For months this appointment had been rumoured insistently, though he repeatedly denied having offered his candidacy for the post, although his high profile in the media during this period indicated otherwise. This shouldn’t surprise us –high positions are rarely obtained by those who don’t want them or seek them. The list of all 29 candidates has not been published, but among the finalists –all of them worthy enough– his name was the most outstanding. His career speaks for itself: as the man in charge of the programme at the Tàpies Foundation, and later as director of the MACBA, he managed to position both institutions, each on its own scale, as domestic and international reference points in the art world. This was fairly easy at the first institution, but more problematical at the second. At the MACBA he not only demonstrated his ability to design a museum with a vitality that both reflects and participates in all current discussions, but he also showed sufficient strength of character to undertake the reorganisation of the museum’s internal structure. It is true that he has been accused of ignoring artists, not only in Catalonia but in Spain as a whole, and of maintaining strict hierarchical relations with his staff, but even if this is the case, his achievements are undeniable. The strong character and capacity he has shown will be needed in his new job. Madrid is not an easy city, since the political pressures –and every other kind– are stronger than any he has yet had to face. In addition, the Reina Sofía urgently needs to be transformed into a museum that can show the leadership that one has every right to expect from such a national institution. Borja-Villel is certainly an excellent choice for this task, although he will not be given a blank cheque. The new director of the Reina Sofía should enter an ongoing dialogue with the different sectors of the art world –and not to bend to their will, but just the opposite– which would be a major change from the practice to date. Also, note must be taken of the loss of powers implied by the recent downgrading of the position from “director general” within the nomenclature of the Ministry of Culture. As regard the direction to be taken or the guidelines to be set for the museum, we have little idea of what Borja-Villel has in mind, beyond the little he has said in public. And we are not impatient, but we think that when the appointment was announced he might have spelled out the proposals that won him the position, after all the talk of transparency in the selection process. At all events, we are very glad about the appointment, and we expect Manuel Borja-Villel to understand that it is always of the person from whom the most is expected that the most will be demanded.
ALICIA MURRÍA
You are reading a preview!
To read the full issue, subscribe or visit us at www.artecontexto.com
38 路 ARTECONTEXTO 路 DOSSIER
SI
L
DOS
E R I S
BRA
A Conversation with
Moacir dos Anjos
AGNALDO FARIAS*
MARCELO SILVEIRA Rua da Usina, 2007. At Panorama da Arte Brasileira, 2007. Courtesy: MAM, São Paulo. Photo: Luigi Stavale.
MAREPE A mudança, 2007 At Panorama da Arte Brasileira, 2007. Courtesy: MAM, São Paulo.
The doctorate in Economics from University College, London, where he studied between 1990 and 1995, did not stop Moacir dos Anjos from devoting himself fully to that which truly interested him: art in general and, specifically, contemporary art. Likewise, his return to Recife, the capital of the state of Pernambuco, in the north-east of Brazil, and his work as a researcher in the field of economics with the technical team of the Fundação Joaquim Nabuco, did not prevent him from showing more and more interest in the cultural sector of the institution, which led to him being asked to work fulltime in this area. His first project as a curator was in 1999, when he was 36 years old. Since then, Moacir dos Anjos has had a very full and successful career, particularly since he became curator of the Museu de Arte Moderna Aloísio Magalhães (MAMAM), in 2001. In the space of ten years, Dos Anjos has managed to attract the attention of the country’s entire artistic community. Despite its distance from the two south-east metropolis, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo, which are separated by a distance of 500 kilometres, Refice is an extremely important city, and enjoys an intense cultural life. And this is what Mocir dos Anjos was able to demonstrate. At the head of a small museum, with an extremely low budget, precarious infrastructures and insufficient staff, he launched the most ambitious and successful curatorial programme ever, which was enough to make him one of the most renowned professionals working in this sector. This interview was conducted during the setting up of Panorama, at the Museu de Arte Moderna, in São Paulo, and at a section of the Bienal do Mercosul, where he worked as co-curator. But, beyond the interest these DOSSIER · ARTECONTEXTO · 39
two projects may arouse, the fact that, in partnership with Paulo Sergio Duarte, he is working on a Brazilian art show, which is scheduled to be inaugurated at the upcoming edition of the ARCO’08 fair, is a good reason for his ideas to be further explored by the readers of ARTECONTEXTO.
Your edition of Panorama, the contemporary art show produced by the Museu de Arte Moderna de São Paulo which has the longest history in the country after the Biennal of São Paulo, continues the discussion on an idiosyncrasy of contemporary art in Brazil, focusing on its contradictory nature. In addition to asking you to expand on this concept, I would like you to tell me about the current relevance of this question. After Cildo Meireles stated, in the early 1970s, during the collective show Information at the MoMA, that his work did not represent any nation in particular, and that Octavio Paz, slightly earlier, expressed his disagreement with the existence of Latin American poetry, do you believe the discussion on Brazilian art is still relevant? The idea of the contradictory leads us to two characteristics which I think are quite common in the Brazilian art produced in the last two decades, and which I feel lend it an unusual “accent”, even though it involves languages, signs, and motifs which are similar to those used by artists in many other parts of the world. On the one hand, we are dealing with artistic production which is quite flexible and agile in its ability to give rise to genealogies of internal and external cultural references, creating hybrid and inventive works. On the other hand, a significant part of this production expresses, in its formal configuration, ideas of immobility, waste or entropy, reflecting, in the sphere of the symbolic, relevant features of the living conditions in contemporary Brazil. I think the comments made by Cildo Meireles and Hélio Oiticica for the catalogue for the show Information (MoMA, 1970) must be interpreted in the context of the military dictatorship which was in power at the time, as a way of preventing their works being identified with the idea of Brazil imposed by the propaganda of the military regime. I believe that, in the work of both these artists, there are several elements which convey a singularity related to the place from which they are expressed. This singularity, however, is not based on the negation of the “other”, but instead persists or is rebuilt by its friction with it. The debate on “Brazilian” art contrasts with the opinion of some critics, who claim that there is hardly any art “made in Brazil” that follows a group of symbolic codes which are “common” to all. Between unyielding demands for an unchanging tradition and complete submissiveness to a homogenising culture, there exists a space for identity affirmation which cannot be reduced to one or other of these extremes. It is in this context of “relation” with the other that it becomes necessary to hold a discussion on the features which lend singularity to Brazilian art. According to this defence of the specificity of Brazilian art, how should we interpret the works which do not fit into the logics of the contradictory, but are also by Brazilian artists? Are they “less Brazilian”? With my work as curator for Panorama da Arte Brasileira I was not trying to 40 · ARTECONTEXTO · DOSSIER
establish that national contemporary production displays, in a hegemonic way, characteristics of the contradictory, as I described them previously. Or, equally, that the works which confirmed these characteristics did not also have other possible meanings. What I am suggesting is that, by presenting them through this prism, we can establish the relevance and topicality of the “Brazilian art” category, more so in a world which constantly seeks to define itself as a space “shared” by all those who inhabit it.
Given your knowledge, or your interest and knowledge in the art which is being produced in various areas of Brazil, are you aware of significant differences? The character of the Brazilian art to which I am referring displays a variety of nuances throughout the geographic and cultural landscape of the country, revealing several levels of adherence and/or rejection to the artistic genealogies (both internal and external) which have become hegemonic in the country in the last few decades. Therefore, these differences express the variety of ways in which these genealogies are perceived, and these, in turn, strongly depend on the available institutional mechanisms in each region of Brazil. Another important factor is the increasing “domestication” of artistic production in the regions where the art market is most developed, while the regions which are not as well served by this market are more likely to have an art production which is harder to categorise. The institutional circuit of art in our country, particularly in museums, is facing a great many difficulties. However, under your management, the Museu de Arte Moderna Aloísio Magalhães (MAMAM), located in Recife, a city in the north-east of Brazil, far from the Rio de Janeiro – São Paulo axis, the sounding board for the production and diffusion of contemporary art, has managed to establish itself as one of the most successful institutions in the country. Which guidelines did you follow to accomplish this? Just the basic guidelines needed to ensure the correct operation of a museological institution, executed in a structured way. Between 200?2006 (my management period), the efforts of the MAMAM were mainly aimed at critically positioning itself in terms of modern and contemporary artistic production. In order to do this, the museum gradually took on the responsibility of devising and producing most of the exhibitions put on there, thus increasing the professionalisation of its team, and commissioning, in some cases, the creation of new pieces by guest artists. Far from contenting itself with entering the country’s pre-existing exhibition circuit, the MAMAM opted for increasing and enriching it from a local perspective. In addition, as part of this reassessment process, we promoted the publications created by the museum to accompany each exhibition it held during this period, as well as the creation of a library specialising in contemporary and modern art. We also implemented a series of measures to ensure the physical and symbolic preservation of its heritage, such as the development of projects for the re-cataloguing and computerization of its entire collection, the cleaning and restoration of the works which were in greatest need of attention, the implementation of a
new environmental control system and the creation of a new technical reserve for three-dimensional works.
After your experience, would you say that Brazilian museums, as opposed to those in other countries where the museological circuit is more established, should make use of new strategies? The situation of Brazilian museological institutions seems to suggest that Brazil arrived belatedly at contemporaneity. What does this mean? It means that, at a time when the demands of the artistic sector on museums are approximately the same as those in any other country, there is a marked difference between the capacity of Brazilian institutions to respond to these demands, and the capacity for adaptation of institutions in countries where a diverse and consistent museological system has been in place for many decades. The problem is that there is no way we can gradually update a belated system, which is conceptually different from a backward system. In a period when economic and symbolic capital is undergoing an internationalisation process, there is no possible progression, as the norm is simultaneousness. In other words, it is not feasible to expect a slow consolidation of an institutional network founded on Brazilian strategies before responding to complex and equally relevant demands. It is crucial to find appropriate (and innovative) ways of funding and managing museums in order to tackle this belatedness, and not allow it to become an obstacle to the acceptance of responsibility in the face of the needs of the art sector in our country. What do you think of the increasing presence of the market in our art system? Firstly, it is important for me to make it clear that my opinions regarding this issue are primarily the result of my experience as curator and director of a public museum, which establishes a specific kind of relationship with galleries and collectors. Having said this, I believe that, in the last 15 years, we have experienced, and are still experiencing a (slow) professionalisation of the Brazilian art market, whereby galleries are not only seeking to sell the work by the artists they represent, but also contribute, in a variety of ways, to the consolidation of their careers. Likewise, there is a clear trend toward internationalisation in Brazilian art galleries, mainly by means of participation in fairs (and, further, by the creation of a fair in Brazil, SP Arte).Despite this, the market is still tremendously concentrated in just a few cities (which, in fact, tends to happen in most countries) and is not open to risk taking; however, some recently opened galleries are using innovative ways of presenting and promoting their artists. It is a market in transformation. Taking into account the fact that the growth of the domestic art market is a recent phenomenon and is largely limited to the city of São Paulo, what kind of impact will it have on production? In other words, are artists entering the market in an objective way or are they still professionals of the “old-school”? I think that the greater the geographic and economic distance from the market, the fewer pressures there will be on artists to adapt to the
Facade of the Museu da Arte Moderna Aloísio Magalhães (MAMAM)
expectations and opinions of gallery directors and collectors. Without a doubt, this lends their work greater freedom and freshness. On the other hand, this distance poses great difficulties to these artists if they want to develop their career with any kind of financial support, as well as lacking the constant scrutiny of their colleagues and access to information from other parts of the world. It is in this ambiguity that artists need to position themselves, which sometimes involves a change of residence or work environment.
What are you and your co-curator, Paulo Sergio Duarte, saving for Spanish audiences on the occasion of the show devoted to contemporary Brazilian production? At Arco’08 there will be a space devoted entirely to Brazil as guest country, with work by 120 artists, represented by 31 galleries from different parts of the country. I must emphasise that these artists were not selected with the idea of suggesting a canon. What can be said is that it will feature not only those artists who are well known by international audiences, but also those who are not yet part of the international art circuit, but who are, in the opinion of curators, well able to compete for the attention of international critics, curators and collectors. In addition, we will hold debates on Brazilian art and performances specifically prepared for the fair. On the other hand, a series of exhibitions is scheduled to take place at art institutions in Madrid (Alcalá 31, Casa de América, Intermediae, and Canal de Isabel II, among others); this will hardly scratch the surface of contemporary visual arts production in Brazil, but the fact is that it will present a vision free from clichés or pre-conceived ideas. Ÿ Agnaldo Farias is a professor at the Architecture and Urban Planning Department at the Universidad de São Paulo, as well as an independent curator. DOSSIER · ARTECONTEXTO · 41
General View of the Fair. Courtesy: Arco-Ifema. Photo: Pablo Tenor
46 路 ARTECONTEXTO
Interview with
LOURDES FERNÁNDEZ, director of ARCO
ALICIA MURRÍA*
After receiving a BA in Art History from the University of Barcelona, and with extensive experience in the area of cultural management, the career of Lourdes Fernández has been linked to art galleries, and to the media group Vocento; between 1994 and 2003 she directed the DV Gallery, and promoted the Artistic Collection of ABC, two projects which were under the auspices of this important media group. Previously (1989-1994), she worked as assistant director of the Marlborough Gallery, in Madrid. She has directed MANIFESTA (2003-2004), and was a member of the organising committee of ARCO, which appointed her as director in the autumn of 2006, following the departure of Rosina Gómez-Baeza, who had directed the Spanish art fair for two decades. For the first edition you directed you maintained the status quo because your appointment as director took place, dates-wise, very close to the celebration of ARCO 07, and you yourself pointed out that the changes you wanted to implement would materialise in ARCO 08. What are the main innovations you have introduced to the fair? How would you describe the Lourdes Fernández “hallmark”? I would rather speak about development than about change. The latter entails a break from previous stages and that has not been the case. It is true that this new direction could not be appreciated in the last edition of the fair, while it can be seen in ARCO 08. In addition, a series of factors have come together; on the one hand, an international scene which favours collecting and allows us to be ambitious, and, on the other hand, the location of the fair in a series of new pavilions, which provide more space. Lastly, the fact that Brazil, which is experiencing a booming artistic production, is the guest country. All of the above makes it possible to introduce some innovations. This year we have two large sections: the General Programme, which will continue along the same lines as previously, and in which 216 galleries will participate, and ARCO 40, formed by 56 galleries that are taking part for the first time in ARCO, with 40-square-metre spaces, which will house the work produced in the last three years by three different artists, and with a very careful selection of galleries emerging on the international scene. ARTECONTEXTO · 47
The architect Juan Ávalos has designed the new pavilions, and I think they are fantastic. He has created a specific place, the Forum, where lectures and debates will take place, and which is integrated into the fair itself; next to it is a space devoted to contemporary art publications, as we think they should occupy an important position. Three curated programmes will also take place during the fair: a section known as Solo Project, with 48 artists presenting their work individually, and who have been selected by 12 experts. Expanded Box will explore the relationship between art and technology, and a new section will be devoted to performance art, which has been selected by two curators. As occurred last year, two days will be devoted to visits by professionals. Lastly, I would like to say that I don’t think there is such a thing as “the Lourdes Fernández hallmark”. I believe it was necessary to rethink the fair, and see what direction it was taking. When you were appointed director of ARCO, replacing Rosina Gómez Baeza, there were a number of important Spanish galleries which, in some ways, did not approve of your appointment, and sometimes even made their support of other candidates very obvious. Do you think things have been smoothed over during the past year? Or is this something which does not worry you? I strongly believe that, from the outset, I have enjoyed the support of galleries, possibly because I myself directed a gallery for fifteen years. I don’t have anything else to say regarding this. Which aspects of Brazil’s presence as guest country would you highlight? It is undoubtedly a powerful player in the art scene. Brazil is participating in ARCO with 105 artists and 30 galleries, and this area was designed by a Brazilian architect, in a space of 1,000 square metres, which provides that country’s contribution with a better presentation and greater protagonism. As you say, Brazil’s creative wealth is extraordinary; it has great figures and a groundbreaking and innovative artistic production. Brazilian galleries are coming by invitation, with no stand expenses, and the cost of transporting the artworks is covered by their country. On the other hand, it has a strong presence in Madrid. Panorama 2007, an exhibition curated by Moacir dos Anjos, will be on display at the Alcalá 31 showrooms, and presents a view of the country’s current art landscape. In addition, La Casa Encendida and other spaces in the city will offer Brazilian art, and the Filmoteca will show a selection of its substantial cinematography. It is interesting how, during ARCO, Madrid goes out of its way to become a wonderful host; all of the institutional showrooms and spaces, including the Museo Reina Sofía, exhibit important selections of the artistic production of the guest country. Paradoxically, however, it is never possible to see a good exhibition of the work of Spanish artists. Do you not feel that doing this year after year implies wasting an opportunity to promote our country’s artistic production? Shouldn’t we be looking for a balance, and trying to be a bit more skillful at promoting our artists? You are probably right, and it might be appropriate to follow that line of 48 · ARTECONTEXTO
action, but these initiatives and decisions are the responsibility of the institutions in question. One of the future plans you announced last year was to reduce the great number of lectures, round tables and debates organised by the fair to coincide with its celebration. We all know that, up to now, many guests and speakers gave their lectures but barely stopped to look at the fair or to gauge Spain’s artistic production. It could be that assigning a “cultural” role to ARCO was necessary in the early days, but is no longer needed; in fact, it capitalises and absorbs activities which should be organised by other institutions, such as the Museo Reina Sofía, as part of their regular activity. I completely agree, and this has been my approach ever since I was appointed director of ARCO. In fact, this section has been greatly reduced because we feel that this should not be our mission. The fair must focus on, and reinforce, commercial aspects, although cultural activities do have a place at ARCO. The presentation of ARCO in the context of other fairs or at committee meetings, coinciding with events in various cities all over the world have given it publicity and have brought about an increase in applications to take part by galleries from other countries. As you can imagine, and although I guess you are tired of this question, I must ask you about the great commotion caused by the rejection of a significant number of Spanish galleries which had been taking part in ARCO for many years. Yes, as you say this is a somewhat tiresome subject, as I have had to speak about it repeatedly in the media. I am glad that you’ve pointed out the promotion efforts we carried out last year. I think that the rise in demand on the part of foreign galleries has had as much to do with the good sales figures of the last three years, as the various presentations of ARCO in São Paulo, Mexico, New York, London, Istanbul and Lisbon. If you add to this the innovations introduced this year, the result has been an enormous increase in demand on the part of highlevel international galleries which has exceeded our expectations. Obviously, we all want to have a good-quality fair, but, perhaps if, previously, attention had been drawn to the need for galleries to make an effort to raise the standards of their programmes and also improve their presentation in ARCO, the situation might possibly have been less drastic. These warnings, for example, were given to important galleries, including Spanish ones, at the Basel fair, and they improved the presentation and content of their stands. Each fair functions in its own way. ARCO has a waiting list and a set of criteria and a scoring system which are scrupulously followed. The selection committee, formed by Spanish and foreign galleries, has acted following these criteria. I don’t feel the process has been so drastic, it’s just that it is the first time it has happened due to the high demand, which has also meant that some important foreign galleries have been excluded. Perhaps in the future, these prior warnings you mention could be given.
Lourdes Fernández Courtesy: Arco-Ifema. Photo: Alfonso Zubiaga
Work of FEDERICO GUZMÁN at ARCO. Courtesy: ARCO-Ifema
What has perhaps not been fully understood is the fact that gallery directors of the stature of Évelin Botella or Enrique Gómez Acebo, who have been genuine pioneers in Spain, with careers spanning more than thirty years, have been excluded; it seems almost an insult to the history of gallery work, as these professionals have experienced truly difficult times. Among those rejected, are galleries with which have followed a praiseworthy path, both in Madrid and other cities, and for some of which it has been almost an act of heroicism to keep going over the years. For many of them, the visibility provided by ARCO, and the turnover it represents, is essential to their survival. Do you think I’m made of stone, that I don’t have feelings? It has been very hard for me to take on this responsibility. You have mentioned people whom I appreciate and respect to an extraordinary degree, real friends of mine from my time as a gallery director, and it has been my duty to pick up the phone and tell them that I was sincerely sorry, which was the truth. And I haven’t been happy about the exclusion of other galleries, both from Madrid and other cities, whose work I respect and feel is very praiseworthy. But it is important to make it clear that the galleries which have been excluded can still take part in the future. This year has seen the return of Anthony Reynolds, Peter Kilchmann and Fortes Vilaça, who had stopped taking part, Chantal Crousel applied to take part, while other foreign galleries have been excluded.
Another issue which I feel must be pointed out is that a great number of the excluded galleries represent young, and, to a large degree, Spanish, artists, many of whom have produced important work, and who now find themselves excluded from the diffusion platform that is ARCO. Some excluded galleries have sought to be represented by their artists in other sections; they have been clever at arousing the curators’ interest in the artists they promote. It must be remembered that there is only a limited space at the fair, and not every gallery which wishes to take part in ARCO can be included. This is what happens at all important fairs, which has resulted in the phenomenon of the parallel fairs that are held at the same time as the major ones, such as the one in Miami, where, at the same time as Miami Basel, six or eight more fairs are held, presenting a wide range of offerings. In my opinion, a key issue is that, if ARCO manages to position itself among the top market showcases in the world, this will benefit the Spanish art system, and will have a positive effect on our artists, whose work will be given an international context. For Spanish galleries, as a whole, it will be undeniable beneficial if ARCO manages to reach a high level.
Ÿ Art critic, curator and director of ARTECONTEXTO
ARTECONTEXTO · 49
CIBERCONTEXTO
From Construction to Reconstruction: Digital Art in Brazil By RAQUEL RENNÓ
Digital culture is often perceived, on the one hand, as decentralised or globalised, and, on the other, as a phenomenon which occurs in economically centralised countries. In this context, it is possible to ask what contribution can be made by Brazil to the field of current debates on digital art? The answer is neither simple nor definitive. In Brazil, new media not only enable artists to communicate their ideas but also to connect seemingly distant worlds, adapting them to daily life, from the recycling of junk, piracy, street culture and mass media, without losing sight of issues specific to the field of visual arts. In this way, their impact and participation has increased in the context of Brazil itself and, as a result, their role in other geographic areas has grown. We can observe how, since the Modernist tradition and the concept of Cannibalism, creative processes in Brazilian art, have combined several elements, which erase the distinction between identity and otherness, high and low culture, electronic waste and state-of-the-art technology. This legacy has repercussions on the country’s digital art. Technology enables us to widen the field of learning and forms of knowledge and visibility, transforming the entire context of artistic work whilst simultaneously blurring, as
predicted by Martín-Barbero, the borders between reason and imagination, knowledge and information, nature and artifice, art and science, expert knowledge and layman’s experience. It is a collage undergoing a constant process of selection and combination. What would be merely entropy (empty spaces with no expected use, rubbish and other kinds of waste which accumulate in the city) is codified and transformed into an organised, although not controlled, system. Let us not forget that, ultimately, what resides in machines is human reality, a reality which has crystallised into structures which function in a specific way and are susceptible to being re-codified in order to create new hybrid structures. By coming into contact with the work of digital artists working in Brazil, it is possible to get to know the local culture, without the need for exotist stereotypes and rigid localist perspectives. Recycling and fragmentation are essential features shared by the work of the selected artists, whether they stem from a specific idea, as in the case of Fernando Rabelo, or a more abstract notion, as displayed by the Generative Art pieces by Vera Bighetti. They all function as catalysts to their surroundings. They use mechanisms of juxtaposition and recycling in order to lend visibility to the material and information generated in great quantities by
Étienne Delacroix
http://www.turbulence.org/Works/mimoSa/ http://atelier-labs.incubadora.fapesp.br/portal Étienne Delacroix is a researcher and professor who carries out alternative projects which seek to merge art and technology in a participative sense. He constructs and deconstructs machines (not only in the physical sense, but also conceptually) which are seen as rubbish and puts them to new uses. By breaking “black boxes”, exposing wires, boards and computer memories, he gives rise to a DIY action on the part of his students, offering projects for training and reflection. His pieces have a function but not a pre-defined form. Instead, their form gradually takes shape by means of the available junk, constituting a work which is not only technical but also creative, combining performance and training, contributing physical possibilities to work with computers, an issue which has been relegated to second place in the market.
Hiperface
www.hiperface.com The work of Fernando Rabelo is a good example of the reappropriation of junk for the building of interactive machines. His participation in both wireless communication network structuring and audiovisual production workshops in favelas is reflected in his personal projects. More than “teaching” a community the codes for creative composition in art and technology, Fernando allows himself to be influenced by the culture of collage and recycling, typical of these social groups, and plays with material and information elements, in a digital cubism which combines different forms of artistic expression, resulting in work where rubbish is recycled, and its memory and “residual intelligence” become apparent.
Cícero Inácio da Silva
http://www.gpsface.com.br/ http://www.itaucultural.org.br/emocaoartficial2/ingles/ exposicao04d.cfm http://www.witz.com.br/cicero/file2006/5.html Cícero Inácio da Silva investigates textual processes in the digital environment, as well as being an artist with an exceptional ability to intervene in these processes. He has already presented textual games where he satirises postmodern philosophy, such as the project Plato On Line, which led some visitors to use the resulting texts from his mixing table as if they were real quotes by philosophers. This compels us to ask: to what point has the Internet provided us with accessible information? What kind of information is generated by means of its fragmented use? On the other hand, his latest work, the GPSface, developed with Marcos Khoriati, continues with his studies on language and its forms of transmission by means of the construction of a social network which makes it possible to find people wherever they may be by means of a GPS with bluetooth and internet access.
Helga Stein
http://www.projecto.com.br/ Helga Stein’s study on photography focuses on the self-portrait as a research tool, while also examining contemporary forms of visibility. With this work, Stein reveals the way in which new technologies give rise to new forms of narcissism. Her pieces Andros Hertz, Narkes, Calhau and Mutance link our most intimate and personal level (the way we wish others to see us) with the wider one of electronic banners and blogs (new contexts in which to see the other). Among the hundreds of photographs she has published, it is impossible to know which is Helga’s “true” likeness. In fact, she presents herself in the most truthful of ways, as she allows us to see her from all angles. In her work, the artist displays the way in which photographic self-portraits, and identity itself, are built from fragments, and only show a small part of what we can be.
Preguiça Febril (Giselle Beiguelman, Rafael Marchetti and Marcus Bastos)
http://pfebril.net/
The Preguiça Febril group–a name which refers to the quotation by Foucault, according to which intellectual and creative life is the result of a strange state of “feverish sloth”– is formed by artists and researchers with established careers, such as Giselle Beiguelman, www.desvirtual.com, Rafael Marchetti, www.influenza.etc.br and Marcus Bastos, http://marcusbastos.net/ This group carries out projects which combine concepts such as: memory of popular culture, collective creation and debates on new media. The often ironic and sarcastic tone which most of their offerings tend to display, emphasises their criticism of a mediaartistic setting which conceals power relations and alienation, usually connected to the advertising discourse.
Art Zero
http://www.artzero.net/links.htm It could be said that Vera Bighetti is the most important Brazilian artist in the field of generative art. Her pieces are focused on the research into the relationships between art, education and the media; in other words, the play between immersion, illusion and forms of perception. The medium of Generative Art allows this artist to build ideas using chance, creating results which are unplanned or impossible to control completely. The pieces developed by Bighetti are directly connected to the journey through cities, the juxtaposition of the sounds and images we find as we walk through them. Here, technological flows and the apparent chaos of urban life are recovered not as a metaphor, but as a creative possibility.
You are reading a preview!
To read the full issue, subscribe or visit us at www.artecontexto.com